Please Finish The Justice System

IwakuraLain42

The main reason why this PvP-Justice system system will never have worked is mostly due to the difference between PvP and PvE playstyles. Most of the player base is not playing PvP (just look at the campaign number or visit them, I mostly see the same ol' players there), this is due to fact that you really need specific gear, skills and training to have any chance at PvP. That's something that most players simply do no want to do. Any kind of PvP based justice system will simply lead to a mass massacre of PvE players by the elite PvP'er, this would kill the game very fast.

And even if you would try to use non-PvP elements to enforce justice (some ideas were posted in last months by users here) I see no way to implement that without giving the potential to griefers (wayshring camping, waiting at the refuges doors, etc). This is IMHO the main reason why ZOS has given up in the concept, it just doesn't work out.

White wabbit

IwakuraLain42 wrote: »

The main reason why this PvP-Justice system system will never have worked is mostly due to the difference between PvP and PvE playstyles. Most of the player base is not playing PvP (just look at the campaign number or visit them, I mostly see the same ol' players there), this is due to fact that you really need specific gear, skills and training to have any chance at PvP. That's something that most players simply do no want to do. Any kind of PvP based justice system will simply lead to a mass massacre of PvE players by the elite PvP'er, this would kill the game very fast.

And even if you would try to use non-PvP elements to enforce justice (some ideas were posted in last months by users here) I see no way to implement that without giving the potential to griefers (wayshring camping, waiting at the refuges doors, etc). This is IMHO the main reason why ZOS has given up in the concept, it just doesn't work out.

IwakuraLain42 wrote: »

The main reason why this PvP-Justice system system will never have worked is mostly due to the difference between PvP and PvE playstyles. Most of the player base is not playing PvP (just look at the campaign number or visit them, I mostly see the same ol' players there), this is due to fact that you really need specific gear, skills and training to have any chance at PvP. That's something that most players simply do no want to do. Any kind of PvP based justice system will simply lead to a mass massacre of PvE players by the elite PvP'er, this would kill the game very fast.

And even if you would try to use non-PvP elements to enforce justice (some ideas were posted in last months by users here) I see no way to implement that without giving the potential to griefers (wayshring camping, waiting at the refuges doors, etc). This is IMHO the main reason why ZOS has given up in the concept, it just doesn't work out.

This about sums it up so the only question is why this is still being discussed , have Zos implied they are going back on their statement that they have no plans to bring this to the game

wolfxspice

im personally in favor of them of them adding the whole pvp justice thing to the game, i think it would be really cool, they were originally going to add a ton of stuff to the game, as seen here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LkeMacg-b0
i'v been reading this thread, yes and i see their point, but theirs something they seem to be ignoring, dont steal, if you do dont get caught.

White wabbit

The only way I can see this happening is if there is an option to switch it off , and I reckon most would have this switched off so that they can go about there PvE in peace so would it be all the effort for Zos to impermanent it

Daemons_Bane

To the person asking what the difference is between escaping a guard and a player.. try and place yourself in an open area, have a good PvP'er attack you while you are trying to escape.... If you find that experience to be the same as a guard, you didn't find a good PvP'er

LaiTash

STEVIL wrote: »

If you wanted consensual pvp based justice play, and if there are the lots of others that want it too

Nobody wants THIS, and you know that, so pls stop trolling or whatever it is you're doing.

ZOS is handing you the core element

ZOS could as well just hand me a MUSH, or a forum-based RPG.

JKorr

Osteos wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Zamrod_beta wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

besides, even if i accept that "getting caught" in injustice activities is somehow failing - "failing" at PVE should not open oneself up to PVP... that doesn't make the PVE more fun more interesting more enjoyable.

or do you think that if we added to Maelstrom Arena that "on a death you get sucked out of MSA, VMSA, HMVSMA and into a PVP conflict with one or more folks geared for PVP" it wouldn't be seen as a takeover of PVE content especially if when you lost the PVP you also lost the loot gained from the arena stages.

yeah... bet that would raise the participation rates of the high end arenas and dungeeons and trials - "death = fail = PVP or lose stuff".

I'm really not sure what the difference is between the following situations:

1) I steal something but I get caught. A guard chases me and kills me. I lose all of my stolen items.

2) I steal something but I get caught. A player chases me and kills me. I lose all of my stolen items.

Why is the fact that one is PvP and the other one isn't such a big deal?

As for the Maelstrom Arena thing, if there was a story reason for why I was fighting a PvP match and I knew it happened on a loss, why not? I question the idea that I'd have to lose all my stuff when I lose the PvP match.

In theory with the Justice System there would be a chance to evade the person so you weren't necessarily going to lose your items just because you were spotted. You might be able to run to a sanctuary before a Bounty Hunter caught up with you. There might be no Bounty Hunters immediately around, allowing you to calmly walk to a sanctuary. Plus, you might just be able to hide from them assuming the system didn't tell them exactly where you were.

I really don't understand the idea of PvP and PvE content needing to be 100% separate all the time. They should only be mixed together when it would make sense and it should be made fun but I don't understand the religious objection to it that just says "It should never be done! Just because!"

Well, to answer the bold, for many players, maybe not you, PVP and PVE are very different things one of which they enjoy more than the other and content that fuses the two usually tends to drive off a significant portion of the audience. thats why IC was such a non-success at least in part. Also, as you can see on the forums in many many places and on most any informed set of posts - the gear, skill setups etc for PVE is different from PVP. if one is conducting PVE content and doing some casual stealing and gets thrown into PVP combat then it will be a less than enjoyable event for them, likely for both if the enforcer actually wants a competitive fight. (Though most of the PVP justice proposals i have seen dont want making the fight competitive a design goal.)

But basically, if you really dont understand or have a clue why PVP vs PVE matters to a significant portion of players, its likely no set of reasons i can provide or anyone can provide can explain it to you. The "divide" between PVP and PVE did not start with ESO discarding their attempt at PVP justice, it has been around for ages and if you haven't gotten a handle on why it exists, why its a difference for some by now... I cant expect a few sentences here would change that.

You didn't answer the bold part at all. Why is it different if a player kills you or a guard kills you?

For example: You kill someone with the blade of woe but weren't careful and get a kill on sight bounty. Off you go to do other things and stuff and get spotted by a guard. Guard gives chase- something happens and you fail to get away resulting in the guard killing you. You respawn at a wayshrine. See it happen everyday in Wayrest. Now if it was a player instead of a guard how is it different?

Guards don't teabag you, follow behind you, and tell you what your mother said while he was banging her last night. Guards usually leave out the swearing, questioning your parentage, and name-calling. Guards are actually rather polite when they kill you.

jcasini222ub17_ESO

@Daemons_Bane I've died to mad mjoll, also definitely not mjoll (pretty sure another mjoll as well lol) and blow apart by Nigel the greats blazing shield of utter pain. I've also died to NPC guards. You know what I thought afterwards? Whelp time to respawn- that's it.

@LaiTash at this point I'd just like the open world hunt/track/avoid ability. Obviously people in this thread don't get it isn't just about the 1v1 but the hunt/escape. The open world, sandbox, hunt across potentially the entire game world. I'd be satisfied if I could do that and call an NPC guard to catch the criminal player. Or as a criminal have the ability to leave red herrings to throw the enforcers off, not even engage in PvP combat.

mystang89

I know zos has already said they aren't going to finish this because of balancing but I think it would be a good compromise if the player who saw the person kill an npc could alert a guard, maybe via a button prompt similar to blade of woe or feeding. This would make people who want to kill npc have to be more careful and add an element of justice instead of just randomly killing in front of tons of people.

I say this yet I do kill npc in front of others.... just not even close to the scale in the op pics.

Sallington

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

Daemons_Bane

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

STEVIL

wolfxspice wrote: »

i'v been reading this thread, yes and i see their point, but theirs something they seem to be ignoring, dont steal, if you do dont get caught.

Why not steal?

No, No No for those about to jump in with "so easy..." etc not about that but about more specifically, what is it about stealing that says it alone among the casual pve content and activity of the game SHOULD have PVP consequences?

its clearly not that "within the game world it is wrong" because as has been pointed out within the cultures thru the game and races thru the game there are tons of other "wrong" things that are done within casual pve content and play that are not allowing PVP intervention.

its clearly not about "innocents" or non-combatents being the targets being the targets because there are plenty of cases where within the game the player can choose to take the "kill innocents" options and no PVP option to stop them is available. if i decide to kill the civilians trapped in the sacrificial nodes instead of taking the longer rescue route you dont get the option to PVP me.

So when you say the folks who dont want PVP consequences are ignoring the "dont steal"... I am not ignoring it at all. I just dont understand how "dont steal" is an answer.

please tell me.

But consider - lets propose adding PVP mercenaries to DELVES. let players sign up with the bosses in delves who get tired of continually getting beaten down by PCs. if the mercenary spots intruders that can challenge them, if they find the intruder has taken stuff from within the delve they can take it back. . if the intruder is spotted attacking the delve's inhabitants then the mercenary can intervene and hey definitely if they attack the boss who pays the rent then BAM WHAM PVP game on.

How is that any less valid to then say "dont delve" if someone doesn't want PVP consequences for running PVE quests into delves or just running casual pve play into delves than it is to say "dont steal" for someone to play casual or quested injustice play?


What is different about a player choosing to play the casual injustice content (sneaking around, lifting good off people with pickpockets, swiping goods from crates and barrels and wardrobes, sometimes attacking and killing folks witha risk of bounty and being attacked by NPCs in PVE) that says this PVE should get PVP play added into it?

And why is it that the PVP element some people want to have added is typically so completely one-sided? So-called enforcers can find and kill so-called thieves engaging in PVE play and cost them the stuff they stole AND extra gold on top of that, but why cant those thieves cant pickpocket good from the enforcers or even take one gold off them if the enforcer loses the fight?

I can even steal from the NPC guards that are unkillable... but not from the enforcers? The thieves have something at risk.... why not the enforcers?

STEVIL

LaiTash wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

If you wanted consensual pvp based justice play, and if there are the lots of others that want it too

Nobody wants THIS, and you know that, so pls stop trolling or whatever it is you're doing.

ZOS is handing you the core element

ZOS could as well just hand me a MUSH, or a forum-based RPG.

They could add those but its possible the ability to challenge and fight other players who are engaged in injustice themed play is something desired by those wanting to add PVP consequences for PVE activities. ZOS has given you that challenge and combat as of OneT.

But i find it very illuminating that you specifically claim nobody (for sake of argument i will interpret that as nobody you know of) wants "consensual pvp based justice play," but we have claims in this thread about how many folks want PVP added into the justice pve play so it really seems the hang-up poison pill here is that word "consensual". (Which some have admitted in this thread iirc.)

Sallington

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

The term carebear is over a decade old, don't really mean it in too harsh of a way. A little harsh though, since they neutered what could have been an amazingly in-depth system. Player-made thieve guilds, player-made enforcer guilds, the foundation of an awesome sandboxy aspect of the game.

I understand that it COULD have been annoying for some people, in the same way getting ganked off your horse is annoying for people in Cyrodil.

If you're a good thief, it's not like enforcers would just be able to kill you on the spot no matter what. If you're a terrible thief and keep getting caught, the risk is that an enforcer might have a chance at killing you. The problem is that people wanted NO risk.

STEVIL

Osteos wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Zamrod_beta wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

besides, even if i accept that "getting caught" in injustice activities is somehow failing - "failing" at PVE should not open oneself up to PVP... that doesn't make the PVE more fun more interesting more enjoyable.

or do you think that if we added to Maelstrom Arena that "on a death you get sucked out of MSA, VMSA, HMVSMA and into a PVP conflict with one or more folks geared for PVP" it wouldn't be seen as a takeover of PVE content especially if when you lost the PVP you also lost the loot gained from the arena stages.

yeah... bet that would raise the participation rates of the high end arenas and dungeeons and trials - "death = fail = PVP or lose stuff".

I'm really not sure what the difference is between the following situations:

1) I steal something but I get caught. A guard chases me and kills me. I lose all of my stolen items.

2) I steal something but I get caught. A player chases me and kills me. I lose all of my stolen items.

Why is the fact that one is PvP and the other one isn't such a big deal?

As for the Maelstrom Arena thing, if there was a story reason for why I was fighting a PvP match and I knew it happened on a loss, why not? I question the idea that I'd have to lose all my stuff when I lose the PvP match.

In theory with the Justice System there would be a chance to evade the person so you weren't necessarily going to lose your items just because you were spotted. You might be able to run to a sanctuary before a Bounty Hunter caught up with you. There might be no Bounty Hunters immediately around, allowing you to calmly walk to a sanctuary. Plus, you might just be able to hide from them assuming the system didn't tell them exactly where you were.

I really don't understand the idea of PvP and PvE content needing to be 100% separate all the time. They should only be mixed together when it would make sense and it should be made fun but I don't understand the religious objection to it that just says "It should never be done! Just because!"

Well, to answer the bold, for many players, maybe not you, PVP and PVE are very different things one of which they enjoy more than the other and content that fuses the two usually tends to drive off a significant portion of the audience. thats why IC was such a non-success at least in part. Also, as you can see on the forums in many many places and on most any informed set of posts - the gear, skill setups etc for PVE is different from PVP. if one is conducting PVE content and doing some casual stealing and gets thrown into PVP combat then it will be a less than enjoyable event for them, likely for both if the enforcer actually wants a competitive fight. (Though most of the PVP justice proposals i have seen dont want making the fight competitive a design goal.)

But basically, if you really dont understand or have a clue why PVP vs PVE matters to a significant portion of players, its likely no set of reasons i can provide or anyone can provide can explain it to you. The "divide" between PVP and PVE did not start with ESO discarding their attempt at PVP justice, it has been around for ages and if you haven't gotten a handle on why it exists, why its a difference for some by now... I cant expect a few sentences here would change that.

You didn't answer the bold part at all. Why is it different if a player kills you or a guard kills you?

For example: You kill someone with the blade of woe but weren't careful and get a kill on sight bounty. Off you go to do other things and stuff and get spotted by a guard. Guard gives chase- something happens and you fail to get away resulting in the guard killing you. You respawn at a wayshrine. See it happen everyday in Wayrest. Now if it was a player instead of a guard how is it different?

Again, if you dont understand the difference between PVE and PVP and the fact that some players prefer one over the other or that its really many players who prefer one over the other to such an extent that iot is recognized and designed for across the game industry... nothing i can say in a few paragraphs here is going to answer it for you.

But i will give you a little bit of effort here.

in PVE its player vs environment - the environment can include actual environment but also lots of different types of NPCs with different capabilities and restrictions. the NPCs have "rules" they follow based on the sense within the game worlds.
First Example: NPC Guards patrol and "walk a beat" and dont seem to have unfallible knowledge of injustice themed quest nodes to sit around.
Second Example: the boss at the end of a delve is there with her flunkies and minions ready to fight intruders, but she hasn't called the bosses from four other delves and the nearby necromancer world boss to come in with her and wait for the next intruder to come along.

basically, if you will, PVE is about basically a sort of tactical them puzzle play, where the developers can setup controlled scenarios for players to engage in that content.

The gear, skills, builds and tactics may vary between these but there are generally good things you would want to do for PVE. Critical hits aren't frequent in PVE for instance so equipping your gear with impen is not worthwhile. Also, NPCs dont have "resource management" so using resource drain poisons against PVE content is not that smart (but threads running right now about how the resource drains hit you in PVP.)

So a player sitting down to run PVE content, spend time playing PVE, is setting up for a type of play and really signing on for a style of play that is drastically different from PVP.

So, the basic lack of understanding shown in your question about it is that your question presumes the events in PVE play and PVP play are the same and is asking why is it that PVE or PVP makes a difference.

The key is the PVP play and PVE play do not produce the same events for the most part.

So the case that you are citing which basically is "what if pvpers just acted like normal npc pve guards" is not what would happen if PVP were added.

So, if it happened, then like in the delving example i listed above, many of those wanting PVE play and not PVP play would (history has shown across the industry) would stop participating in that formerly PVE content. it wouldn't get PVP players to run their characters like PVE guards do.

Imagine iof two teams showed up for baseball and one team changed it to soccer in mid game... that would likely result in some folks deciding "this isnt something i want to do," right?

of course, there is also maybe for some the fact that that NPC guard - i can steal from. i can pickpocket that guard and get stuff, sometimes valuable stuff that sells for a lot. have not seen a PVP justice yet that allows pickpocketing pvp enforcers

Again, doubt this will be sufficient to explain it to you if you haven't figured out the difference between PVP and PVE by now. But maybe some of the different perspectives and examples will give you something to ponder on.

Dubhliam

.

STEVIL wrote: »

wolfxspice wrote: »

i'v been reading this thread, yes and i see their point, but theirs something they seem to be ignoring, dont steal, if you do dont get caught.

Why not steal?

No, No No for those about to jump in with "so easy..." etc not about that but about more specifically, what is it about stealing that says it alone among the casual pve content and activity of the game SHOULD have PVP consequences?

its clearly not that "within the game world it is wrong" because as has been pointed out within the cultures thru the game and races thru the game there are tons of other "wrong" things that are done within casual pve content and play that are not allowing PVP intervention.

its clearly not about "innocents" or non-combatents being the targets being the targets because there are plenty of cases where within the game the player can choose to take the "kill innocents" options and no PVP option to stop them is available. if i decide to kill the civilians trapped in the sacrificial nodes instead of taking the longer rescue route you dont get the option to PVP me.

So when you say the folks who dont want PVP consequences are ignoring the "dont steal"... I am not ignoring it at all. I just dont understand how "dont steal" is an answer.

please tell me.

But consider - lets propose adding PVP mercenaries to DELVES. let players sign up with the bosses in delves who get tired of continually getting beaten down by PCs. if the mercenary spots intruders that can challenge them, if they find the intruder has taken stuff from within the delve they can take it back. . if the intruder is spotted attacking the delve's inhabitants then the mercenary can intervene and hey definitely if they attack the boss who pays the rent then BAM WHAM PVP game on.

How is that any less valid to then say "dont delve" if someone doesn't want PVP consequences for running PVE quests into delves or just running casual pve play into delves than it is to say "dont steal" for someone to play casual or quested injustice play?


What is different about a player choosing to play the casual injustice content (sneaking around, lifting good off people with pickpockets, swiping goods from crates and barrels and wardrobes, sometimes attacking and killing folks witha risk of bounty and being attacked by NPCs in PVE) that says this PVE should get PVP play added into it?

And why is it that the PVP element some people want to have added is typically so completely one-sided? So-called enforcers can find and kill so-called thieves engaging in PVE play and cost them the stuff they stole AND extra gold on top of that, but why cant those thieves cant pickpocket good from the enforcers or even take one gold off them if the enforcer loses the fight?

I can even steal from the NPC guards that are unkillable... but not from the enforcers? The thieves have something at risk.... why not the enforcers?

The difference is ZOS never suggested adding PvP mercenaries into delves.
That is plain stupid.
I don't know who would want or even suggest such a thing.

STEVIL

jcasini222ub17_ESO wrote: »

At this point I'd just like the open world hunt/track/avoid ability. Obviously people in this thread don't get it isn't just about the 1v1 but the hunt/escape. The open world, sandbox, hunt across potentially the entire game world. I'd be satisfied if I could do that and call an NPC guard to catch the criminal player. Or as a criminal have the ability to leave red herrings to throw the enforcers off, not even engage in PvP combat.

Well, first, why cant you do that now?

What is stopping you and another player or group of players who want a cat-n-mouse hunt play to go and do it within the game now to get the hunt and escape?

i described a consensual cat and mouse game just a few posts back. I limited it to an agreed upon area and an agreed upon time, since you know if its really "i can be anywhere in the world" its too big to be feasible to hunt me down. But we can set this up in any place in the world (except the pvp part you aren't interested in since the upcoming dueling has limits.)

What is different from "catching" a "thief" who has "bounty" rushing up to them and opening the justice dialog (for whatever non-pvp resolution you have in mind) and "catching" the "robber" by running up and starting an interact dialog you agree beforehand counts as catching?

For some, it seems that the difference is that whole "consensual" part.

but on a related note: would you be ok to adding the same cat-n-mouse interrupt to other casual play like say letting my vamp character hunt down and interrupt folks killing vamps or my argonian hunting folks killing crocodiles or green pact players hunting folks picking plants or... or... or... or... or... or... or... or... insert tons of other actions taken in casual play and in quests that people do that certain groups and even authorities within the game world find inappropriate or deserving of punishment.

LaiTash

JKorr wrote: »

And why is it that the PVP element some people want to have added is typically so completely one-sided? So-called enforcers can find and kill so-called thieves engaging in PVE play and cost them the stuff they stole AND extra gold on top of that, but why cant those thieves cant pickpocket good from the enforcers or even take one gold off them if the enforcer loses the fight?

Because there is no "guards bank vendor" command in ESO. Because it would make people be forced to use 3rd person out of combat. Because enforcers will be effectively banned from croded towns. And after all, it is just a weird idea to only allow thiefes steal only from "police". Other then that, i'm all for allowing thieves to steal from any player. But the penalties for doing this and getting caught should be really harsh. And you'll be the first against this because "PVP response for PVE activities" and other semi-religious BS.

STEVIL

Sallington wrote: »

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

The term carebear is over a decade old, don't really mean it in too harsh of a way. A little harsh though, since they neutered what could have been an amazingly in-depth system. Player-made thieve guilds, player-made enforcer guilds, the foundation of an awesome sandboxy aspect of the game.

I understand that it COULD have been annoying for some people, in the same way getting ganked off your horse is annoying for people in Cyrodil.

If you're a good thief, it's not like enforcers would just be able to kill you on the spot no matter what. If you're a terrible thief and keep getting caught, the risk is that an enforcer might have a chance at killing you. The problem is that people wanted NO risk.

there are much older words than carebear which are deemed offensive and which likely should not be used on public forums if one doesn't want to be taken as offensive... whether one decides for themselves they are offensive or not. All the online dictionaries for carebear the gaming term i saw listed it as a pejorative.

As for the second bold, unless you have seen someone lobbying for removal of bounty and removal of NPC guards then the statement is untrue.

The "risk" in casual injustice play is there now, it is minimal for those prepared, informed and who play it well.

this is just like it is for delving, grinding questing and the tons of other casual play PVE content in the game.
The rewards for play over time are about the same too - though IMX delving is the most profitable overall for again those prepared, informed and who know what they are doing.

As for the guesses about the difficulty and so forth of a PVP infused justice system, it depends on which of the many submitted proposals are assumed. Some folks want PCs to be able to SPOT crimes... so the presumptions about not getting caught etc... not necessarily assured.

but as for having no risk wanting PCs... back to that whole care bear pejorative thing...

I dont recall ANY risk for the enforcer?
i dont recall any "and if the criminal evades the enforcer the enforcer loses ABC" but i do recall plenty of "if caught criminal loses stolen good plus bounty" for those which offered a non-fight resolution option when caught by enforcer.
i dont recall "if the thief wins the fight against the enforcer, the enforcer loses ABC." but i do recall lots of "if the criminal loses the fight with the enforcer they lose the stolen goods and bounty"
I dont recall "by becoming an enforcer you open yourself up to any participating player wanting to pickpocket you, so literally, anyone you might be able to spot or go after if they commit crimes can also stealth up and take your stuff with X% chance based on skill etc." but i do recall lotsa "if you have bounty you may be pursued, challenged and or attacked by enforcers and your loot is at risk"
there may have been options where criminals could just attack enforcers (but not take stuff from them so again, no risk to the enforcer) but there have definitely been ones where attacking the enforcer was prevented until the enforcer went after you... a nice edge in the pvp aspect of the fight for the enforcer... (again which group is it that wants NO RISK?)

Anyone playing even the PVE justice has a risk acceptance thing going... if i screw up i can lose the stuff... or at least lose some bounty counter stuff... unless i spent skill so that that is mitigated or eliminated in some cases. maybe they are good enough to turn that risk to close to zero, just like you know my actual risk with my characters attacking a giant is practically nil now... thats the PVE player thingy.

but the players who seem to be focused on no risk gameplay... they seem to be more to the point the ones wanting risk free enforcers throwing PVP at folks for PVE actions... did i miss the consequence for losing for a pvp enforcer?

it goes even further...

last time i checked in casual pve play if i fight some trash mob and win or lose, i have damaged gear most of the time which costs gold to repair.

is that true for casual PVP play? (sure there are set areas or specific tel var things but... are telvar stones in peril everyehwere, even in dueling... even in justice enforcing?)

its not for OneT dueling iirc. that even gives free on the spot rezz.

if a PVE player gets killed against a mob or a boss or w world boss or an NPC guard , they either spend a gem or get sucked back to an earlier position or shrine OR have spent skill points to get one free every so often.

if a PVP OneT dueler dies, they get a free rezz.

Maybe i am very confused about which of these groups PVE vs PVP or Injustice players vs PVP enforcer wannabees are the ones actually seeking to have truly no risk gameplay.

Khenarthi

I just want to steal stuff from NPCs and containers, dressed with my specific PVE thieving gear, with specific PVE thieving-and-evading skills and potions slotted, without someone attacking me because I've been naughty. I have no wish to engage other people when I am thieving. I have no gear/knowledge/skills to fight another player, but I am awesome at escaping guards, on the rare moments I am caught.

If that makes me a carebear, I will wear that badge with pride. I just want nothing to do with PVP activities when I am not in Cyrodiil (and that's why the first thing I will do on Update 12 is set up to auto-decline duels).

Sallington

I agree that there should be penalties on both sides of the justice system for losing an engagement. That's a no-brainer. Enforcers could even be perma-flagged and open to attack at all times. There are a ton of options. Is it that you just don't trust ZOS enough to be able to pull off a fair and balanced system?

More than anything, what sucks about this system being less than half complete, is that it would have brought great community involvement into the game. Something that is severely lacking in this MMO.

White wabbit

So you accdentally pick up a item next to a guild trader or the best one next to the pledge giver , and hey presto someone pounding on you for there PvP action hmmm I think not

Sallington

White wabbit wrote: »

So you accdentally pick up a item next to a guild trader or the best one next to the pledge giver , and hey presto someone pounding on you for there PvP action hmmm I think not

There's an option to turn off these kinds of whoopsie daisies already. Non-issue.

jcasini222ub17_ESO

@STEVIL are you intentionally being obtuse?

Where's the tracking system? Can I summon a dog to track in a town?

Where's the getaway option? Can I bribe an innkeeper to give false information to an enforcer? Or to place a false scent marker to throw of the dog?

Those systems sound pretty cool to me.

I don't believe these things are in game, right? Literal system things making the game engaging. Beyond for guilds to just coordinate.

When I'd be thieving I wouldn't want to alert the enforcer guild and vice versa. Blind hunt/escape with added in game features. Is that difficult to understand? You seem to consistently gloss over the fine details you so care about and spout asinine examples. Ignoring all suggestions. You pulled out a quote where I even go onto point out I'd be fine with zero PvP in that scenario just craving a more robust player driven system. Did you read that?

*** it could be opt in just like duels. Placed on top of the current justice system. So if you don't check the box all those features wouldn't come into play and you can theive to your heart's content.

cjthibs

Sallington wrote: »

White wabbit wrote: »

So you accdentally pick up a item next to a guild trader or the best one next to the pledge giver , and hey presto someone pounding on you for there PvP action hmmm I think not

There's an option to turn off these kinds of whoopsie daisies already. Non-issue.

Some people just want to be free to do whatever they feel like at any time with zero consequences...

Chasing thieves, and being chased by others was one of the most fun experiences in older games like UO. I guess those who never lived in harsher MMO's are just too scared to even try.

There's a reason why ESO has been continually softened up for the carebears since the one-time lead designer for UO left.
I shudder-to-think the kind of crying that would've happened if Mr. Sage would've stuck around.

White wabbit

Sallington wrote: »

White wabbit wrote: »

So you accdentally pick up a item next to a guild trader or the best one next to the pledge giver , and hey presto someone pounding on you for there PvP action hmmm I think not

There's an option to turn off these kinds of whoopsie daisies already. Non-issue.

But doesn't that switch off all whoopsie daisies I would have to switch on and off when I want to be naughty

Daemons_Bane

Sallington wrote: »

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

The term carebear is over a decade old, don't really mean it in too harsh of a way. A little harsh though, since they neutered what could have been an amazingly in-depth system. Player-made thieve guilds, player-made enforcer guilds, the foundation of an awesome sandboxy aspect of the game.

I understand that it COULD have been annoying for some people, in the same way getting ganked off your horse is annoying for people in Cyrodil.

If you're a good thief, it's not like enforcers would just be able to kill you on the spot no matter what. If you're a terrible thief and keep getting caught, the risk is that an enforcer might have a chance at killing you. The problem is that people wanted NO risk.

Here is where the problem comes.. If I derp around in my relaxed PvE set, since that can easily handle guards, and I end up in a house with a hardcore PvP'er, I'm doomed.. He follows me, he uses combo attacks/weaving, and he has no area that he has to return to due to his coding.. That means that I will either have to gear for PvP or accept death.. Yes in some places people will be able to get away with theft because the spot is not worth camping, but the people who get off on killing us WILL find the better thief spots and camp them to get their fix.. And before you start complaining that I generalize about PvP'ers, remember that if you are just a standard person running around, I do not mean you.. But we all know, even if some won't admit it, that there ARE people who will camp these spots to get at the thieves.. And some of those people are not going to care if the thief is a low lvl new player

And that's why we won't get the system anytime soon.. It HAS TO BE TESTED THOROUGHLY! Because some people are going to wan't to get at other people, no matter what

cjthibs

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

The term carebear is over a decade old, don't really mean it in too harsh of a way. A little harsh though, since they neutered what could have been an amazingly in-depth system. Player-made thieve guilds, player-made enforcer guilds, the foundation of an awesome sandboxy aspect of the game.

I understand that it COULD have been annoying for some people, in the same way getting ganked off your horse is annoying for people in Cyrodil.

If you're a good thief, it's not like enforcers would just be able to kill you on the spot no matter what. If you're a terrible thief and keep getting caught, the risk is that an enforcer might have a chance at killing you. The problem is that people wanted NO risk.

Here is where the problem comes.. If I derp around in my relaxed PvE set, since that can easily handle guards, and I end up in a house with a hardcore PvP'er, I'm doomed.. He follows me, he uses combo attacks/weaving, and he has no area that he has to return to due to his coding.. That means that I will either have to gear for PvP or accept death.. Yes in some places people will be able to get away with theft because the spot is not worth camping, but the people who get off on killing us WILL find the better thief spots and camp them to get their fix.. And before you start complaining that I generalize about PvP'ers, remember that if you are just a standard person running around, I do not mean you.. But we all know, even if some won't admit it, that there ARE people who will camp these spots to get at the thieves.. And some of those people are not going to care if the thief is a low lvl new player

Or...I dunno, be careful about who you steal in front of?

Daemons_Bane

cjthibs wrote: »

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Daemons_Bane wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

People like playing in their little carebare solo RPG world without consequences. I guess adding the depth of a full Justice system would have been a bad thing. Lets just buy more costumes and mounts.

It's not that we don't want any consequences at all.. We just don't want bored PvP'ers to be the ones handling it, as that would almosy certainly be a bad system.. The fact that you call people carebears just for having another view, suggests to me that you are one of the persons rhat I would not care to see in such a system

The term carebear is over a decade old, don't really mean it in too harsh of a way. A little harsh though, since they neutered what could have been an amazingly in-depth system. Player-made thieve guilds, player-made enforcer guilds, the foundation of an awesome sandboxy aspect of the game.

I understand that it COULD have been annoying for some people, in the same way getting ganked off your horse is annoying for people in Cyrodil.

If you're a good thief, it's not like enforcers would just be able to kill you on the spot no matter what. If you're a terrible thief and keep getting caught, the risk is that an enforcer might have a chance at killing you. The problem is that people wanted NO risk.

Here is where the problem comes.. If I derp around in my relaxed PvE set, since that can easily handle guards, and I end up in a house with a hardcore PvP'er, I'm doomed.. He follows me, he uses combo attacks/weaving, and he has no area that he has to return to due to his coding.. That means that I will either have to gear for PvP or accept death.. Yes in some places people will be able to get away with theft because the spot is not worth camping, but the people who get off on killing us WILL find the better thief spots and camp them to get their fix.. And before you start complaining that I generalize about PvP'ers, remember that if you are just a standard person running around, I do not mean you.. But we all know, even if some won't admit it, that there ARE people who will camp these spots to get at the thieves.. And some of those people are not going to care if the thief is a low lvl new player

Or...I dunno, be careful about who you steal in front of?

I play in first person.. I can not see who enters the house after me.. I can hide from the npc characters, but with the speed we can attain in this game, a new player can appear instantly.. They can also appear from a login.. You can't do anything about that

STEVIL

Sallington wrote: »

White wabbit wrote: »

So you accdentally pick up a item next to a guild trader or the best one next to the pledge giver , and hey presto someone pounding on you for there PvP action hmmm I think not

There's an option to turn off these kinds of whoopsie daisies already. Non-issue.

No there isnt. You can accidentslly pick up a potion or sword or bread and no option to turn it off. The option is whether or not you auto loot a container or whether a red steal container throe a dialog.

Obviously could change.

But right now its not that hard when at a busy trader who is moving.